1)

(a)What is the problem with the Beraisa, which begins by saying 'Chalah Shalosh, v'Avad Shalosh, Eino Chayav Lehashlim', and then continues 'Chalah Kol Shesh Chayav Lehashlim'?

(b)How do we resolve it?

(c)In view of this Beraisa, how do we establish the previous Beraisa, which implies that even if he was sick all six years, he goes free at the end of six years?

1)

(a)The problem with the Beraisa, which begins by saying 'Chalah Shalosh, v'Avad Shalosh, Ein Chayav Lehashlim', and then continues 'Chalah Kol Shesh Chayav Lehashlim' is that the inference from the Reisha ('Chalah Arba') contradicts the inference from the Seifa.

(b)We resolve this problem by explaining the Beraisa like this: 'Chalah Shalosh, v'Avad Shalosh, Ein Chayav Lehashlim, Ha Chalah Arbah, Na'aseh k'Mi she'Chalah Kol Shesh, v'Chayav Lehashlim'.

(c)In view of this Beraisa, we establish the previous Beraisa, which implies that even if he was sick all six years, he goes free at the end of six years when he was at least able to do needlework. Otherwise, he would have had to work for another six years.

2)

(a)In another Beraisa, Rebbi Meir maintains that when the Eved Ivri goes free, he receives five Sela'im from each of three species for Ha'anakah. Which species?

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, he receives thirty Sela'im. What does Rebbi Shimon say?

(c)Why does Rebbi Meir find it necessary to conclude with the words 'she'Hein Chameish-Esrei Sela'im'? Is it not obvious that three times five equals fifteen?

2)

(a)In another Beraisa, Rebbi Meir maintains that when the Eved Ivri goes free, he receives five Sela'im for Ha'anakah from sheep, wine and oil.

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, he receives thirty Sela'im, whilst Rebbi Shimon says fifty.

(c)Rebbi Meir finds it necessary to conclude with the words 'she'Hein Chameish-Esrei Sela'im' to teach us that even if he does not give the Eved five Sela'im of each of these kinds, it would not matter, as long as he gives him a total of fifteen.

3)

(a)Rebbi Meir learns a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Reikam" "Reikam" ("Lo Seshalchenu Reikam"). In which connection is the "Reikam" written?

(b)On what grounds does he then require five Sela'im from each of the species, and not the sum total of five?

(c)And why does he learn this 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from Bechor and not from Olas Re'iyah, which is only two Me'ah Kesef (according to Beis Shamai)?

3)

(a)Rebbi Meir learns a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Reikam" "Reikam" ("Lo Seshalchenu Reikam" in Re'eh). The source of the other "Reikam" is Pidyon ha'Ben (where the Torah writes "v'Lo Yera'u Panai Reikam" in Ki Sisa).

(b)He requires five Sela'im from each of the species, and not the sum total of five because of the wording of the Pasuk" ... v'Lo Seshalchenu Reikam. Ha'anek Ta'anik Lo mi'Tzoncha ... " (implying that he gives him the required sum in Tzon, in Goren and in Yekev).

(c)And he learns this 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from Bechor and not from Olas Re'iyah, which is only two Me'ah Kesef (according to Beis Shamai) because the Torah writes "Asher Berachecha Hash-m Elokecha", implying that one gives him more rather than less.

4)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah learns "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from an ox which gored an Eved (Kena'ani). We ask why he does not learn "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin. How much would he then receive?

(b)We reject this suggestion however, on the basis of the principle 'Tafasta Merubeh Lo Tafasta' (we always learn from the smaller amount). What other reason do we give for Rebbi Yehudah's choice?

(c)Why do we need to give a second reason?

(d)We initially give the source of Rebbi Shimon as "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin. We ask why he does not learn from the least amount of Erchin. How much would that be?

4)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah learns "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from an ox which gored an Eved (Kena'ani). We ask why he does not learn "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin in which case he would receive fifty Sela'im.

(b)We reject this suggestion however, on the basis of the principle 'Tafasta Merubeh Lo Tafasta' (it is preferable to learn the smaller amount, which is included in the larger amount). The other reason for Rebbi Yehudah's choice is because he prefers to learn Eved from Eved).

(c)We need to give a second reason because otherwise, "Asher Berachecha" would have overridden the principle of 'Tafasta Merubeh ... ').

(d)We initially give the source of Rebbi Shimon as "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin. We ask why he does not learn from the least amount of Erchin three Sela'im.

(e)We answer with the Pasuk "Asher Berachecha ... " (as we explained earlier).

5)

(a)On what grounds do we refute the previous source (of "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin to explain Rebbi Shimon)?

(b)So what is Rebbi Shimon's source?

(c)What is the basis of the Machlokes Tana'im? Why does each Tana Darshen the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from a different word?

5)

(a)We refute the previous source of "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Erchin to explain Rebbi Shimon on the grounds that he should then have learned "Nesinah" "Nesinah" from Eved (like Rebbi Yehudah, for the reasons quoted above).

(b)Rebbi Shimon's source is "Michah" "Michah" (still from Erchin).

(c)The basis of the Machlokes Tana'im (why each Tana Darshens the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from a different word is because that is how they received it from their Rebbes.

6)

(a)Why does the Torah need to write "Tzon, Goren v'Yekev" according to Rebbi Meir?

(b)What problem does this pose on Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon?

(c)How do we know that, according to Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon, Ha'anakah is not confined to "Tzon, Goren v'Yekev"?

6)

(a)The Torah needs to write "Tzon, Goren v'Yekev" according to Rebbi Meir to teach us that the total sum of Ha'anakah is fifteen Sela'im, as we explained earlier.

(b)This poses a Kashya on Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon, who do not connect the sum total of Ha'anakah with "Tzon, Goren v'Yekev". According to them why does the Torah need to mention them?

(c)We know that, according to Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon, Ha'anakah is not confined to "Tzon, Goren v'Yekev" because the Torah adds "Asher Berachecha Hash-m Elokecha", implying that one may give him any commodities that fall in the category of Berachah.

7)

(a)According to Rebbi Shimon, the Torah specifies these three commodities in order to preclude money. What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov say?

(b)Why does ...

1. ... Rebbi Shimon decline to learn like Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov?

2. ... Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov decline to learn like Rebbi Shimon?

(c)Having written ...

1. ... "Tzon", why does the Torah need to insert "Goren"?

2. ... "Goren", why does the Torah need to insert "Tzon"?

3. ... "Tzon and Goren", why does the Torah need to insert "Yekev"?

7)

(a)According to Rebbi Shimon, the Torah specifies these three commodities in order to preclude money. According to Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov they preclude mules (which do not proliferate).

(b)Rebbi ...

1. ... Shimon declines to learn like Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov because granted mules do not proliferate; they do however, grow.

2. ... Eliezer ben Yakov declines to learn like Rebbi Shimon is because money can be invested.

(c)Having written ...

1. ... "Tzon", the Torah needs to insert "Goren" to teach us that what grows from the ground is included no less than living species.

2. ... "Goren", the Torah need to insert "Tzon" to teach us that living species are included no less than what grows from the ground.

3. ... "Tzon and Goren", the Torah needs to insert "Yekev" to preclude either money or mules, as we just explained.

17b----------------------------------------17b

8)

(a)What does the Tana Kama learn from ...

1. ... the double expression of "Ha'anek Ta'anik"?

2. ... "Asher Berach'cha Hash-m Elokecha"?

(b)Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah learns from "Asher Berach'cha Hash-m Elokecha" that if the master's house was not blessed on his account, he is not obligated to give him Ha'anakah. How does he then explain the double expression "Ha'anek Ta'anik"?

8)

(a)The Tana Kama learns from ...

1. ... the double expression of "Ha'anek Ta'anik" that the master is obligated to give the Eved Ivri Ha'anakah, even though he did not bring Berachah to his house.

2. ... "Asher Berachecha Hash-m Elokecha" that he should give him the minimum Ha'anakah in any case, but should increase it, in accordance with the Berachah.

(b)Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah learns from "Asher Berachecha Hash-m Elokecha" that if the master's house was not blessed on his account, he is not obligated to give him Ha'anakah and the reason that the Torah uses the double expression "Ha'anek Ta'anik" is due to the principle 'Dibrah Torah Ki'Leshon Bnei Adam'.

9)

(a)The Beraisa discusses what happens to the Eved Ivri after his master's death. A Mocher Atzmo or a Machruhu Beis-Din continue to serve the son until his term ends. What does the Tana say about ...

1. ... serving his daughter (or his brother)?

2. ... an Amah Ivriyah?

3. ... a Nirtza and a Nimkar l'Akum?

(b)What does the Tana of another Beraisa learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Re'eh va'Avadcha Shesh Shanim"?

2. ... in Mishpatim "Shesh Shanim Ya'avod"?

(c)Which ...

1. ... two advantages do a son have over a brother?

2. ... advantage does a brother have over a son?

(d)Why does the advantage that ...

1. ... a brother performs Yibum and not a son not match the fact that a son makes Yi'ud and not a brother?

2. ... a son has the same power as his father regarding Sdei Achuzah not count to give a son two advantages over the brother's one?

9)

(a)The Beraisa discusses what happens to the Eved Ivri after his master's death. A Mocher Atzmo or a Machruhu Beis-Din continue to serve the son until his term ends. Neither of them ...

1. ... serve his daughter (or his brother), whereas ...

2. ... an Amah Ivriyah a Nirtza and ....

3. ... a Nimkar l'Akum do not even serve the son or the daughter either (but go free).

(b)The Tana of another Beraisa learns from the Pasuk ...

1. ... va'Avadcha Shesh Shanim" that the Eved Ivri serves the master for six years, but not his heirs.

2. ... "Shesh Shanim Ya'avod" that he must serve the full six-year term (i.e. in the event of his master's death, he continues to serve his son for the rest of his term).

(c)The ...

1. ... two advantages of a son over a brother are that he can perform Yi'ud with his father's Amah Ivriyah and that, should he redeem his father's inherited field that his father declared Hekdesh, he retains it in the Yovel (i.e. it does not go to the Kohanim, which it would do if his brother or anyone else redeemed it).

2. ... advantage of a brother over a son is that he performs Yibum.

1. ... a brother performs Yibum and not a son does not match the fact that a son makes Yi'ud and not a brother because if there was a son, the brother would not perform Yibum in the first place.

2. ... a son has the same power as his father regarding Sdei Achuzah does not count to give a son two advantages over the brother's one because in fact, we only know there that it is the son rather than the brother, from the same source as in our Sugya ('if there was a son, the brother would not perform Yibum').

10)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in Re'eh (in connection with a Nirtza) "v'Af la'Amascha Ta'aseh Kein" that an Amah Ivriyah does not even serve her master's son upon his death. What do we learn from ...

1. ... the redundant word "Ta'aseh"?

2. ... the Pasuk in Mishpatim (in connection with Retzi'ah) "v'Im Amor Yomar ha'Eved"?

(b)And what do we learn from the Pasuk ...

2. ... in Behar (in connection with a Nimkar l'Akum) "v'Chishav Im Koneihu"?

(c)What does Rava extrapolate from this latter Derashah (of Chizkiyah)?

10)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk "v'Af la'Amascha Ta'aseh Kein" that an Amah Ivriyah does not even serve her master's son upon his death. And from ...

1. ... the redundant word "Ta'aseh" we learn that her master is obligated to give her Ha'anakah when she leaves.

2. ... the Pasuk "v'Im Amor Yomar ha'Eved" we learn that only an Eved Ivri can have his ear pierced (to continue working until the Yovel) but not an Amah Ivriyah.

(b)And from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Mishpatim "v'Ratza Adonav Es Ozno ba'Martze'a va'Avado l'Olam" we learn that, in the event of his master's death, a Nirtza does not even serve the son (but goes free).

2. ... in Behar "v'Chishav Im Koneihu" Chizkiyah learns that, in the event of his master's death, a Nimkar l'Akum works for the Akum but not for his heirs.

(c)Rava extrapolates from the Derashah of Chizkiyah that the son of a Nochri inherits his father.

11)

(a)The Mishnah in Demai discusses two brothers, a Ger and a Nochri who inherit their Nochri father. What does the Tana say about a case where the Ger strikes an agreement whereby his brother takes the idols and he, the money; his brother the wine, and he, the fruit, assuming this agreement is reached ...

1. ... before they divided their father's property?

2. ... after they divided it?

(b)What does Rava extrapolate from there? How would the Din differ in a case of Yerushah d'Oraisa?

(c)What is the basis for the Isur?

(d)Why did the Rabanan issue this decree (declaring the Ger to be an heir)?

11)

(a)The Mishnah in Demai discusses two brothers, a Ger and a Nochri who inherit their Nochri father. In a case where the Ger strikes an agreement whereby his brother takes the idols and he, the money; his brother the wine, and he, the fruit, assuming this agreement is reached ...

1. ... before they divided their father's property, says the Tana it is valid.

2. ... after they divided it it is invalid.

(b)Rava extrapolates from there that a Ger inherits his Nochri father only mid'Rabanan. This is because, if it were d'Oraisa, the heir would not be permitted to make such a stipulation even before he has received the property (seeing as, the moment his father dies, the property belongs to him, whether he has already taken it or not).

(c)The basis for the Isur is benefiting from Avodah-Zarah.

(d)The Rabanan issued this decree (declaring the Ger to be an heir) because they were afraid that, otherwise (if the Ger's brother would inherit more than him, he might give up everything and go back to his former religion).

12)

(a)What distinction does the Beraisa make with regard to a Ger and his Nochri brother inheriting their father, that further bears out Rava's ruling?

(b)What does the Beraisa say about someone who borrowed money from a Ger who converted together with his sons, should the Ger died?

(c)How do we reconcile this with the Mishnah in Shevi'is, which says 'Ru'ach Chachamim Nochah Heimenu'?

(d)What does Rava extrapolate from the Beraisa?

12)

(a)The Tana of another Beraisa further bears out Rava's ruling by restricting the above concession to a Ger and his brother who came to inherit, but not to a case where they were partners, in which case no stipulation is permitted.

(b)The Beraisa says that if, in the case where someone borrowed money from a Ger who converted together with his sons and the Ger died the Chachamim are indifferent ('Ein Ru'ach Chachamim Nochah Heimenu') should the debtor return the debt to his heirs.

(c)We reconcile this with the Mishnah in Shevi'is, which says 'Ru'ach Chachamim Nochah Heimenu' by establishing that Mishnah when (although the son was conceived when his father was still a Nochri) his father had already converted by the time he was born. In such a case, the Chachamim would encourage him to pay the outstanding debt to the son, to avoid people erroneously inferring that one is not obligated to repay a debt to a Yisrael.

(d)Rava extrapolates from the Beraisa that a Ger does not inherit a Nochri at all even mid'Rabanan (otherwise, why would the Chachamim not be pleased with the debtor for paying the money to the Nochri's converted heir?).